(And forgive most of this- I'm still floundering within it....)
Only inasmuch as the shaman seems to me, (since I see it as a
_falsehood_) to be an economic niche within the culture, inasmuch as it
_needs_ to be within _a_ culture. A shaman displaced is a sham....
At any rate, the shaman approaches a high lifestyle within the tribe, in
the terms of comfort and respect, which I view as tribal monies.
Ultimately, 'money' boils down to how one is paid. In early societies, a
shaman was an attractive niche in this economic matrix. (I think....)
I am not a deconstructive economist- ;-) this could well be very flaky
crust on an unfilled tart. It's all an attempt on my part to explain why
people are led to believe in the 'non-physical'. ;-) Cuz I don't.
But what was 'money' back when the world was young? One could produce it,
through goods or the hunt, one could reproduce it, through wives and
children (or through husbands and children), or one could create a need
for it, through shamanism. It is always attached to power, and to comfort.
So I don't know- still toying with this. But I need a damned good reason
to sway off this track.
*****************
Wade T. Smith
morbius@channel1.com | "There ain't nothin' you
wade_smith@harvard.edu | shouldn't do to a god."
morbius@cyberwarped.com |
******* http://www.channel1.com/users/morbius/ *******